Mailing lists [pgsql-hackers]

9 January 2006

• 00:04   lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Tom Lane
• 02:29   TODO: Allow INET + INT4 to increment the host part of the address kevin brintnall
• 02:35   Re: TODO: Allow INET + INT4 to increment the host part of the address Tom Lane
• 04:39   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Greg Stark
• 06:55   Re: Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working Stefan Kaltenbrunner
• 09:28   Re: Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE Simon Riggs
• 09:52   Re: Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE Lukas Smith
• 10:01   Re: Incremental Backup Script Gregor Zeitlinger
• 10:45   Re: ISO 8601 Intervals Michael Glaesemann
• 11:17   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Andrew Dunstan
• 12:35   Re: ISO 8601 Intervals Larry Rosenman
• 12:40   Re: Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working Jim Buttafuoco
• 13:03   Re: Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working Stefan Kaltenbrunner
• 13:21   Re: Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working Jim Buttafuoco
• 13:38   Re: Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE Greg Stark
• 14:06   Re: ISO 8601 Intervals Ron Mayer
• 14:16   Re: ISO 8601 Intervals Ron Mayer
• 14:48   Re: Stats collector performance improvement Hannu Krosing
• 15:03   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Tom Lane
• 15:21   Re: Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working Kurt Roeckx
• 15:21   Re: Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE Greg Stark
• 15:25   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Andrew Dunstan
• 15:47   Re: Fw: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working Jim Buttafuoco
• 16:06   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Tom Lane
• 16:17   Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Neil Conway
• 16:57   Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Tom Lane
• 17:05   Re: catalog corruption bug Jeremy Drake
• 17:20   Re: [PATCHES] plpgsql: check domain constraints Tom Lane
• 17:28   Re: catalog corruption bug Tom Lane
• 18:23   Re: PLs and domain constraints Thomas Hallgren
• 18:28   Re: PLs and domain constraints Tom Lane
• 18:29   Re: PLs and domain constraints Neil Conway
• 18:41   Re: catalog corruption bug Jeremy Drake
• 18:42   Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Neil Conway
• 18:51   Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Tom Lane
• 19:22   Fw: Returned mail: see transcript for details Jim Buttafuoco
• 19:23   พนักงานธุรการยุคใหม่ Modern Office Management System Waso Training Center
• 19:30   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Andrew Dunstan
• 20:23   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Tom Lane
• 21:38   Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Neil Conway
• 21:49   Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful Tom Lane
• 22:11   Re: cleaning up plperl warnings Bruce Momjian
• 22:19   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Andrew Dunstan
• 22:39   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Bruce Momjian
• 22:43   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Tom Lane
• 22:49   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Andrew Dunstan
• 22:50   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Bruce Momjian
• 23:01   Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug) Andrew Dunstan
• 23:41   Re: Improving N-Distinct estimation by ANALYZE Greg Stark
• 23:59   Re: Is anyone interested in getting PostgreSQL working on mips[el]? Jim Buttafuoco